Affirmative Action

Affirmative Action

What is a current, legal definition of “Affirmative Action?”
Affirmative action was introduced as a means of equalizing aspects of education, employment and opportunities for women and various minority groups. It is also referred to as employment equity. This policy came into place from the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Women needed to receive some form of special consideration in gaining entrance to universities, getting employment opportunities and as receiving federal contracts.

The gender issue also presents itself as women in most cases; find themselves competing with their male counterparts to gain access to various services in the society (Sally, 2003). Affirmative action, therefore, revolves around the concept of civil rights and equality with regards to social aspects and at the same time, the provision of the same opportunities to different groups.
Groups that have benefitted from Affirmative Action hiring policies and practices.
Popular belief has it that the African Americans are the sole beneficiaries of affirmative action. Rather, the majority of the people have benefited from this aspect, where resources have been adequately redirected to the neediest sector. Various groups have benefited from affirmative action. These include; women, blacks or African Americans and American Indians or Alaskan natives. Other groups include; veterans who served in the war, the veterans who took part in military operations, disabled veterans and separated veterans.
According to the labor department in the United States, the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action are white women (Richard, 2012). More than six million women workers based on estimates are in much higher occupational classifications, which would not be the case without policies on affirmative action. Affirmative action, in the long run, benefits everyone, either directly or indirectly. Affirmative action programs lead to the development of employment norms and more so, equal access to jobs, training and promotions to workers. These distinctive policies have resulted to the increased women representation as well as minority groups across various levels in the field of employment in the United States.
Affirmative action also expands the talent pool for jobs and leads to the creation of diversity in the workforce. Typically, white makes enjoy more earnings as compared to white women. On average, they get $9000 more than minority men and $14000 more than white women. The inequality in salary payment needs to be done away with; hence affirmative action should be encouraged. 40% of the American population comprises white men, yet they occupy 86% of faculty positions. White women have benefited more than anyone due to the implementation of affirmative action policies and practices.
Originally, white women would not get legislative positions and due to affirmative action, hurdles of opportunities are available for this group on the contemporary world. An original lawsuit was filed on affirmative action on behalf of Abigail Fisher, who was denied admission into the University of Texas because she was white (Richard, 2012). Fisher is exactly a good example of those white women who have benefited from the poles introduced on behalf of minority groups. White women in the United States have, therefore, had similar opportunities with regards to social services. In the long run, equality would prevail regardless of age, color or ethnic background.
Groups that have been disadvantaged by Affirmative Action hiring policies and practices.
Strong affirmative action has been attributed to preferential treatment, which has faced major controversies over the years. This may come in as a result of discriminating or favoring particular members in the society or at the same time, giving representative positions just to satisfy the principle of equality while at the same time, doing injustice to other members. Preferential hiring, preferential training or nontraditional casting, as well as minority scholarships of race norming, has been rampant in the United States (Sally, 2003).
Most citizens agree that the government has greatly abandoned its responsibility to provide the necessities to every American. This makes the situation worse on a daily basis. Despite the evidence of a prosperous economy in the United States, women, and children, as well as the poor significantly, suffer. The ideal equality opportunity for all, to them, is a clear joke. African Americans are viewed as a legacy to slavery and this may, in the long run, may lead to the fall of a nation and division. Two wrongs, therefore, do not make a right, and the federal government should be on the forefront to ensure that as services are extended to specific groups, thers are not discriminated after all.
Parents and children from all backgrounds should be considered as well. The black women should be treated equally as the white, to prevent the black society from suffering discrimination as a result of reinforcement of affirmative action policies and practices. Native Americans, Hispanics and the handicapped need to be well looked after. Amendments should be introduced but has over the years; bee interpreted as "Equal protection for all equals, but some equals are more equal than others”. Back women and children should, therefore, be protected against unrealistic enforcements of policies in the society and the nation at large, for both Americans.
How does it relate to hiring in the public sector? In particular, what is currently allowed and not allowed in terms of hiring policies and practices?
The public sector is the most influenced as a result of affirmative action and implementation of various practices. For instance, employment and hiring practices in the public sector have been tuned to workforce analysis, availability analysis, utilization analysis and goals and timetables. Use of incumbency versus availability analysis is used to calculate and estimate underrepresentation, which entails hiring personnel and formulation of hiring goals (Leora, 2005).
A collection of employee workforce data and collection of external availability data are considered to be of the essence, especially in the labor market. In terms of the hiring policies and practices, the fair representation of women is allowed in the public sector, while discrimination among races and ethnic groups is discouraged. It is, therefore, essential to ensure that most of the groups in the society are well represented, and at the same time, the required participants or groups well acknowledged.
What is currently required of public sector organizations either at the federal level or in your particular state or city, in terms of Affirmative Action policies?
Some organizations are required by law to establish written codes to ensure that they fit into distinct categories. Various regulations include; a depository of all amounts of government funds, an issuing and paying agent of the United States bonds and each employer is required to create written documents to implement the anti-discrimination lawsuits (Leora, 2005). Affirmative action policies, therefore govern the public sector requirements based on various implemented acts. The hiring procedures in the public sector narrow down to the enhancement of equity and at the same time, representation of all in various positions.
















References
Sally, K. (2003). Affirmative Action Has helped White Women More Than Anyone. Retrieved from http://ideas.time.com/2013/06/17/affirmative-action-has-helped-white-women-more-than-anyone/
Richard, S. (2012). Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students. London: Routledge Publishers
Leora, M. (2005). Affirmative Action. New York: John Wiley and Sons